I think what you’re missing is that even if you had completely free, taxpayer-funded mail delivery you’d have corporations profiting off it: the corporations sending the mail.
Corporations send by far the majority of mail. In my job, I personally, have sent over 100,000 pieces of mail in a single week. Most of that mail gets sent to other businesses, not individual people. Why should taxpayers be subsidizing that?
Because a centralized universal solution is more efficient. Why should healthy people subsidize the sick? Why should drivers subsidize busses? Why should pedestrians subsidize highways? Why should people with solar panels subsidize power plants? Why have public services at all?
You could argue that businesses should pay more, but the fact that a service is useful is not an argument to shut it down.
I think what you’re missing is that even if you had completely free, taxpayer-funded mail delivery you’d have corporations profiting off it: the corporations sending the mail.
Corporations send by far the majority of mail. In my job, I personally, have sent over 100,000 pieces of mail in a single week. Most of that mail gets sent to other businesses, not individual people. Why should taxpayers be subsidizing that?
Because a centralized universal solution is more efficient. Why should healthy people subsidize the sick? Why should drivers subsidize busses? Why should pedestrians subsidize highways? Why should people with solar panels subsidize power plants? Why have public services at all?
You could argue that businesses should pay more, but the fact that a service is useful is not an argument to shut it down.